Plants undergoing heat and low-CO 2 stresses emit large amounts of volatile isoprenoids compared with those in stress-free conditions. One hypothesis posits that the balance between reducing power availability and its use in carbon assimilation determines constitutive isoprenoid emission rates in plants and potentially even their maximum emission capacity under brief periods of stress. To test this, we used abiotic stresses to manipulate the availability of reducing power. Specifically, we examined the effects of mild to severe drought on photosynthetic electron transport rate (ETR) and net carbon assimilation rate (NAR) and the relationship between estimated energy pools and constitutive volatile isoprenoid emission rates in two species of eucalypts: Eucalyptus occidentalis (drought tolerant) and Eucalyptus camaldulensis (drought sensitive). Isoprenoid emission rates were insensitive to mild drought, and the rates increased when the decline in NAR reached a certain species-specific threshold. ETR was sustained under drought and the ETR-NAR ratio increased, driving constitutive isoprenoid emission until severe drought caused carbon limitation of the methylerythritol phosphate pathway. The estimated residual reducing power unused for carbon assimilation, based on the energetic status model, significantly correlated with constitutive isoprenoid emission rates across gradients of drought (r 2 . 0.8) and photorespiratory stress (r 2 . 0.9). Carbon availability could critically limit emission rates under severe drought and photorespiratory stresses. Under most instances of moderate abiotic stress levels, increased isoprenoid emission rates compete with photorespiration for the residual reducing power not invested in carbon assimilation. A similar mechanism also explains the individual positive effects of low-CO 2 , heat, and drought stresses on isoprenoid emission.
Diverse methods have been used to sample insect semiochemicals. Sampling methods can differ in efficiency and affinity and this can introduce significant biases when interpreting biological patterns. We compare common methods used to sample tephritid fruit fly rectal gland volatiles (‘pheromones’), focusing on Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera tryoni. Solvents of different polarity, n-hexane, dichloromethane and ethanol, were compared using intact and crushed glands. Polydimethylsiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene and polyacrylate were compared as adsorbents for solid phase microextraction. Tenax-GR and Porapak Q were compared as adsorbents for dynamic headspace sampling. Along with compounds previously reported for B. tryoni, we detected five previously unreported compounds in males, and three in females. Dichloromethane extracted more amides while there was no significant difference between the three solvents in extraction of spiroacetals except for (E,E)-2,8-dimethyl-1,7-dioxaspiro[5.5]undecane for which n-hexane extracted higher amount than both dichloromethane and ethanol. Ethanol failed to contain many of the more volatile compounds. Crushed rectal gland samples provided higher concentrations of extracted compounds than intact rectal gland samples, but no compounds were missed in intact samples. Of solid phase microextraction fibers, polyacrylate had low affinity for spiroacetals, ethyl isobutyrate and ethyl-2-methylbutanoate. Polydimethylsiloxane was more efficient for spiroacetals while type of fiber did not affect the amounts of amides and esters. In dynamic headspace sampling, Porapak was more efficient for ethyl isobutyrate and spiroacetals, while Tenax was more efficient for other esters and amides, and sampling time was a critical factor. Biases that can be introduced by sampling methods are important considerations when collecting and interpreting insect semiochemical profiles.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.